Magnet Winners

Once again we are in magnet selection season.  The new selection criteria are not well publicized, but it still isn't a true lottery.  After siblings and feeder pattern magnet students are placed, priority goes to applicants who live in 'high performing nodes'.   You can look up your node's performance rating here.

What exactly does this mean?  I decided to map the high performing nodes to see who gets first choice of magnet seats.  It confirmed what I'd suspected--that large swaths of the county will be virtually shut out of the magnet 'lottery'.

Am I the only one who finds this disturbing?  Disgusting, even? Superintendent Tata recently explained this priority, as reported by Keung Hui on the Wake Ed blog:

"The magnet program is designed to prevent the creation of high-poverty schools, at least for the Group 1 magnets," Tata said. "If you connect economic disadvantage or economic advantage with achievement and performance as the research shows, what you want to do is get higher-achieving students into the magnets schools and then as you displace students that have traditionally lower performance, you want to give them priority as I just talked about in some of the higher-performing schools. What we don't want to find ourselves in is a situation where we have the magnet program yet what we do is we invite more poverty into the magnet schools.  That would seem to be a little bit counterproductive."

Does anybody really think that WCPSS staff is worried about a sudden rush of low performing or low income kids applying for magnets?  Or is the fear the same as it has always been: that high performers/middle to upper income kids from low performing/high poverty schools will leave for magnets?  Looks like if you live in Eastern Wake or Garner and have your sights set on a magnet, you'd better move.   

“The magnet program is designed to prevent the creation of high-poverty schools, at least for the Group 1 magnets," Tata said. "If you connect economic disadvantage or economic advantage with achievement and performance as the research shows, what you want to do is get higher-achieving students into the magnet schools and then as you displace students that have traditionally lower performance, you want to give them priority as I just talked about in some of the higher-performing schools. What we don’t want to find ourselves in is a situation where we have the magnet program yet what we do is we invite more poverty into the magnet schools. That would seem to be a little bit counterproductive.” 1323026393 Magnet application period opening amid changes and questions The News and Observer Copyright 2011 The News and Observer . All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

Read more here: http://blogs.newsobserver.com/wakeed/magnet-application-period-opening-amid-changes-and-questions#storylink=cpy

“The magnet program is designed to prevent the creation of high-poverty schools, at least for the Group 1 magnets," Tata said. "If you connect economic disadvantage or economic advantage with achievement and performance as the research shows, what you want to do is get higher-achieving students into the magnet schools and then as you displace students that have traditionally lower performance, you want to give them priority as I just talked about in some of the higher-performing schools. What we don’t want to find ourselves in is a situation where we have the magnet program yet what we do is we invite more poverty into the magnet schools. That would seem to be a little bit counterproductive.” 1323026393 Magnet application period opening amid changes and questions The News and Observer Copyright 2011 The News and Observer . All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

Read more here: http://blogs.newsobserver.com/wakeed/magnet-application-period-opening-amid-changes-and-questions#storylink=cpy

“The magnet program is designed to prevent the creation of high-poverty schools, at least for the Group 1 magnets," Tata said. "If you connect economic disadvantage or economic advantage with achievement and performance as the research shows, what you want to do is get higher-achieving students into the magnet schools and then as you displace students that have traditionally lower performance, you want to give them priority as I just talked about in some of the higher-performing schools. What we don’t want to find ourselves in is a situation where we have the magnet program yet what we do is we invite more poverty into the magnet schools. That would seem to be a little bit counterproductive.” 1323026393 Magnet application period opening amid changes and questions The News and Observer Copyright 2011 The News and Observer . All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

Read more here: http://blogs.newsobserver.com/wakeed/magnet-application-period-opening-amid-changes-and-questions#storylink=cpy

“The magnet program is designed to prevent the creation of high-poverty schools, at least for the Group 1 magnets," Tata said. "If you connect economic disadvantage or economic advantage with achievement and performance as the research shows, what you want to do is get higher-achieving students into the magnet schools and then as you displace students that have traditionally lower performance, you want to give them priority as I just talked about in some of the higher-performing schools. What we don’t want to find ourselves in is a situation where we have the magnet program yet what we do is we invite more poverty into the magnet schools. That would seem to be a little bit counterproductive.” 1323026393 Magnet application period opening amid changes and questions The News and Observer Copyright 2011 The News and Observer . All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

Read more here: http://blogs.newsobserver.com/wakeed/magnet-application-period-opening-amid-changes-and-questions#storylink=cpy

“The magnet program is designed to prevent the creation of high-poverty schools, at least for the Group 1 magnets," Tata said. "If you connect economic disadvantage or economic advantage with achievement and performance as the research shows, what you want to do is get higher-achieving students into the magnet schools and then as you displace students that have traditionally lower performance, you want to give them priority as I just talked about in some of the higher-performing schools. What we don’t want to find ourselves in is a situation where we have the magnet program yet what we do is we invite more poverty into the magnet schools. That would seem to be a little bit counterproductive.”

Read more here: http://blogs.newsobserver.com/wakeed/magnet-application-period-opening-amid-changes-and-questions#storylink=cpy

“The magnet program is designed to prevent the creation of high-poverty schools, at least for the Group 1 magnets," Tata said. "If you connect economic disadvantage or economic advantage with achievement and performance as the research shows, what you want to do is get higher-achieving students into the magnet schools and then as you displace students that have traditionally lower performance, you want to give them priority as I just talked about in some of the higher-performing schools. What we don’t want to find ourselves in is a situation where we have the magnet program yet what we do is we invite more poverty into the magnet schools. That would seem to be a little bit counterproductive.”

Read more here: http://blogs.newsobserver.com/wakeed/magnet-application-period-opening-amid-changes-and-questions#storylink=cpy

“The magnet program is designed to prevent the creation of high-poverty schools, at least for the Group 1 magnets," Tata said. "If you connect economic disadvantage or economic advantage with achievement and performance as the research shows, what you want to do is get higher-achieving students into the magnet schools and then as you displace students that have traditionally lower performance, you want to give them priority as I just talked about in some of the higher-performing schools. What we don’t want to find ourselves in is a situation where we have the magnet program yet what we do is we invite more poverty into the magnet schools. That would seem to be a little bit counterproductive.”

Read more here: http://blogs.newsobserver.com/wakeed/magnet-application-period-opening-amid-changes-and-questions#storylink=cpy

“The magnet program is designed to prevent the creation of high-poverty schools, at least for the Group 1 magnets," Tata said. "If you connect economic disadvantage or economic advantage with achievement and performance as the research shows, what you want to do is get higher-achieving students into the magnet schools and then as you displace students that have traditionally lower performance, you want to give them priority as I just talked about in some of the higher-performing schools. What we don’t want to find ourselves in is a situation where we have the magnet program yet what we do is we invite more poverty into the magnet schools. That would seem to be a little bit counterproductive.”

Read more here: http://blogs.newsobserver.com/wakeed/magnet-application-period-opening-amid-changes-and-questions#storylink=cpy

“The magnet program is designed to prevent the creation of high-poverty schools, at least for the Group 1 magnets," Tata said. "If you connect economic disadvantage or economic advantage with achievement and performance as the research shows, what you want to do is get higher-achieving students into the magnet schools and then as you displace students that have traditionally lower performance, you want to give them priority as I just talked about in some of the higher-performing schools. What we don’t want to find ourselves in is a situation where we have the magnet program yet what we do is we invite more poverty into the magnet schools. That would seem to be a little bit counterproductive.”

Read more here: http://blogs.newsobserver.com/wakeed/magnet-application-period-opening-amid-changes-and-questions#storylink=cpy

“The magnet program is designed to prevent the creation of high-poverty schools, at least for the Group 1 magnets," Tata said. "If you connect economic disadvantage or economic advantage with achievement and performance as the research shows, what you want to do is get higher-achieving students into the magnet schools and then as you displace students that have traditionally lower performance, you want to give them priority as I just talked about in some of the higher-performing schools. What we don’t want to find ourselves in is a situation where we have the magnet program yet what we do is we invite more poverty into the magnet schools. That would seem to be a little bit counterproductive.”

Read more here: http://blogs.newsobserver.com/wakeed/magnet-application-period-opening-amid-changes-and-questions#storylink=cpy

Manipulating Capacity to Fill Unpopular Schools

Why would the Long Range capacity at Durant Road Elementary be changed from 935 to 772?  Maybe because a brand new school is opening across the street from DRES next year.  Actually the school (E-20) is opening in the modular campus next year, which is located on Spring Forest Road about a block east of East Millbrook Middle School.  Its permanent location across the street from Durant Road Elementary won't be open for a few years.  Somebody has to fill that school and what better way than to have less capacity at Durant Road Elementary?  

I am having an a-ha moment as I type this.  Another nearby elementary school also had some strange things happening with its capacity.  Wildwood Forest's capacity is 793 in the 2010-11 Facility Utilization Report, 644 in the assignment plan and has a current student population of 863.  Interesting. 

In the new controlled choice plan, filling new schools is all done by 'choice'.  Nobody is reassigned to that new school and the new schools will open with only grades K-3.  They keep emphasizing that nobody is assigned to a school--that we all choose the school we want our kids to go to.  But if there isn't any capacity or there is reduced capacity, how much of a choice is there? 

In the Student Assignment document document, they list the capacity for each grade at each school.  You can find the 2011-12 student membership numbers for each school broken down by grade here.

Referring to those documents, you can see that for both Wildwood Forest and Durant Road Elementary schools, there are more students per grade than will be allowed under the new capacity figures in the assignment plan.  They aren't going to kick any students out of those schools, but when newcomers enter the system, there won't be any seats for them at those schools and they will be sent somewhere else.  Somewhere like E-20 or perhaps an under enrolled school that nobody wants to go to. 

It will be very easy for WCPSS to manipulate the capacity numbers at schools in order to funnel kids where they ultimately want them to go.  One of the selling points of this plan is supposed to be that staff will be able to tell very early on which schools are "under chosen" and then do something to help those schools attract families.  First, we don't need a choice plan to tell us which schools are unpopular and will be under chosen.  We've known for years and we've done nothing about them before.  Second, it won't matter if a school is "under chosen"--if it's on your list you could end up there.  Somebody has to go there and with the ability to manipulate capacity numbers at surrounding schools it will be easy to fill all of the schools.

I know that I am being very skeptical here, maybe even a bit paranoid, but after spending more than 6 years following WCPSS issues, I've earned my skepticism. 

Capacity in the Controlled Choice Plan

 Looking over the capacity figures that were part of the Student Assignment Plan document presented to the board 2 weeks ago, I noticed some inconsistencies.  Last year, WCPSS came out with the 2010-11 Facility Utilization Report that listed the capacity for each school. 

Capacity is looked at in two ways:  Long Range School Campus Capacity (LRSCC) and Annual School Campus Capacity (ASCC).  LRSCC is the School Building Capacity plus the optimum number of temporary classrooms.  In other words, the capacity of the brick and mortar building plus the optimum number of trailers for that campus.  Now it could be argued that trailers are not ideal at all, but WCPSS has come up with a way to determine the optimum number for each campus.  You can find this info on page 6 of the Facility Utilization Report that I referenced above.

ASCC is the actual capacity of the school as we are using it today, which can include more than the optimum number of trailers.  In fact, most of our schools have more than the optimum number of trailers and some have less.  ASCC also includes adjustments for programs such as Pre-K and self-contained classrooms.  That part gets a little confusing and is really fairly minor in the grand scheme of things.

So what does this all mean in the Controlled Choice Plan?  The plan says that it uses LRSCC for the capacity numbers but the numbers they are using in the plan don't always match up to the 2010-11 Report.  I've asked WCPSS why this is but I haven't heard back from them yet.  Many of the school capacities only differ by less than 50 students but some differences are perplexing.  What is really concerning, however, is that many of our schools are well over the LRSCC yet we are now going to fill schools according to that lower number.

An extreme example is Durant Road Elementary.  The LRSCC in the 2010-11 Report is 935, in the Assignment Plan it is listed as 772, and the actual student population this year is 1030.  Those are some huge differences.  The Kindergarten capacity in the assignment plan is listed as 126 but there are 202 Kindergarteners at Durant Road this year.  That's 76 students who would have to go somewhere else in the new plan.  Where would they go?

This leads me to my first of two big questions regarding capacity in this assignment plan.  Will staff manipulate capacity numbers at certain schools in order to steer students where they want them to go?  Since this is getting a bit long, I'll answer this question in the next post.

Little Known Details of the Controlled Choice Plan

Going through the Controlled Choice plan, I found some interesting details that aren't widely known. 

•  Your choices are determined by your node.  The choices themselves are determined by the distance from the center of your node.  But the proximity of your choices is determined by your specific address.  People within a node can have proximity priority for different schools.
•  Transfer requests can still be made, but only to a school not on your magnet or base school choice lists.  So if all of your neighbors got into School A and your child is the only one going to School B, you cannot apply for a transfer to School A.  If School A was your first choice, you will be placed on the waiting list but you cannot apply for a transfer.
• You can no longer turn down a year round school because of the track.  Track allocations are made after school assignments are given.  If you don't like your track and the school is unable to change it, the only recourse you have is to apply for a transfer.  But remember--you can't apply for a transfer to a school on your original choice list and you won't have transportation if you get a transfer. 

Blue or Green: False Choice

How many people actually looked at the other 7 plans that the Student Assignment Task Force came up with?  I'm guessing not very many.  The task force 'developed' 9 plans and then presented the two front runners to the public for comment.  I found it very convenient that the two plans were: 1) pretty much the same thing we have now and 2) a slightly modified version of the Alves plan.  What were the other ideas and could they really find nothing better than these 2?

I looked at the other seven proposals and all I could do was shake my head.  My favorite was the Teal Plan, which was basically a big flip of the bird to neighborhood school supporters.  The Teal Plan called for every student to attend the absolute closest school, no matter how overcrowded or under enrolled some schools ended up.  The most asinine part of this plan was that magnets and year round schools were filled only with proximate students.  Nobody could apply to these schools.  We would still fund magnet programs but nobody would be able to apply to them.  We would still have year round schools, but nobody could apply.  Nor could the students assigned to the year round schools apply to a traditional option.

I still shake my head when I think about this 'plan'.  The recurring question in my mind is "We paid for the task force to come up with THIS?!?"  Truly, this is the best that this task force could come up with?  And then they presented the blue and green plans to us as the two most feasible options?  It sure seems to me that they had the Alves plan in mind all along and needed a way to shove it down our throats under the guise of having done due diligence.

Priority Round Manipulations in the Choice Plan

We jumped a huge hurdle last year when the board eliminated socio-economic discrimination from the magnet selection process. Now it appears that it is creeping back in, albeit in a different form.

WCPSS has posted the latest assignment plan presentation on their assignment website: "http://assignment.wcpss.net/next/board-work-session-presentation--09-20-2011.pdf" It includes the following priority rounds:

Priority 1: Incoming siblings of current WCPSS students

Priority 2: Students who live within 1.5 miles of their first-choice school

Priority 3: Students whose nearest school is more than 1.5 miles from their home and who select that school as their first-choice school

The first 3 priorities are the same as they've always been and besides the fact that you're still not guaranteed a spot in rounds 2 and 3, there's really nothing to complain about here. Well, I take that back. One factor not addressed here is feeder patterns for middle and high school selection. This question was asked at the Millbrook High info meeting and they said that feeder pattern comes before siblings. So for middle and high schools, the first priority goes to students following the feeder pattern, then they move on to siblings. Since the feeder patterns are designed to fill the middle and high schools naturally, how many seats will actually be available for those who want to leave their feeder pattern or for newcomers to the system?

Priority 4: Group 2 Proximity and Group 3 magnet students rising into 6th or 9th grade that have attended a Group 2 or Group 3 magnet elementary school whose first choice is the magnet middle or high school for their magnet program pathway

First, a reminder of what Group 2 and Group 3 elementary magnets are. Group 2 are: Brooks, Combs, Conn, Douglas, Joyner, Underwood, & Wiley. Group 3 magnets are: Farmington Woods, Smith, Wendell & Zebulon. Group 2 magnets are located in middle to upper income areas and are to be filled with 40-45% Magnet students/55-60% Proximity. They say that Group 3 magnets are located in the further reaches of the county and are there as 'equity magnets'. Wendell and Zebulon were indeed opened as equity magnets, but I don't think Farmington Woods was and Smith definitely wasn't. Group 3 magnets are to be filled with 10-20% magnet/80-90% proximity students.

Second, the magnet lottery is separate from the 'regular' lottery so I wouldn't think that too many of the Group 3 elementary magnet students would have the magnet middle and high schools on their 'choice lists'.

Third, I find it interesting that Group 2 Proximity students get priority for the middle and high magnets but the Group 3 Proximity students don't. Why is that? Will there be an explanation? Is there a way for Group 3 Proximity students to get a 'magnet' seat so they can automatically follow the feeder pattern?

Priority 5: Students residing in a node designated as “low-performing” whose first-choice school is a regional school choice (R1 or R2)

It appears that instead of calling them 'achievement' or 'high performing' schools, WCPSS is now calling them 'regional school choices'. They have divided the county into 4 regions, starting from central Raleigh/Inside the Beltline. The 'achievement' school choices are within your region.

They are obviously trying to balance for achievement, but I wonder if this will backfire on them. A few years ago, Chuck Dulaney and the previous board came up with an idea for attracting more low income families to Year Round schools. They changed the selection criteria for year round so that if you lived in a high poverty node and were assigned to a high poverty school, you had priority for a year round school. It backfired and middle class families in those nodes who had previously been denied YR were finally accepted.

I am not against giving families an 'achievement' choice, just pointing out that WCPSS may not have thought this through very well if their goal is balancing the schools by 'achievement'.

Priority 6: Students residing in a node designated as “high-performing” whose first-choice school is a magnet school and/or is located in a low-performing area

This is where the sneaky manipulation really comes in. First, since the magnet lottery is separate, are we talking about nodes having magnet schools on their 'choice lists'? Which nodes have which magnets on their lists? Are these all proximate nodes or are they farther away? I ask because as I've illustrated in a previous post, there are nodes north of I-540 that had Brentwood and Millbrook magnet elementaries on their choice lists when there were more proximate schools not on their lists.

Second, this could play a part in filling the Group 2 magnet proximity seats. If there aren't enough students in the middle to upper income areas surrounding those magnet schools to fill the 55-60% proximity seats, then they have to start drawing from students who have those schools on their 'choice list'. Each student whose closest school is a Group 1 magnet (those located in low income areas) has the following choice list: closest Group 1 magnet, next closest Group 1 magnet, proximate Group 2 magnet, 3 Regional Choices, proximate traditional non-magnet and proximate year round non-magnet.

I think that most of those families will pick their closest and second closest Group 1 magnet as their first 2 choices. There are not enough proximity seats at those magnets to fit all of the students who will choose them, so they will be moved on down to their 3rd choice. My guess is that the 3rd choice will be the proximate Group 2 magnet or the proximate tradtional non-magnet, whichever is closer. Since there aren't many proximate non-magnets in those areas, I would think the proximate Group 2 would be chosen as 3rd. This might create a problem if 'too many' of the kids from the low achieving areas were given seats at those schools. By placing a priority on students applying from high achieving nodes, they ensure that won't be a problem. It would be interesting to see who has each magnet on their regular choice list. I've requested maps showing this for each school, but was told they don't exist.

Third, and most important, we are introducing a new form of discrimination into the selection process. They finally got rid of SES as a factor but they are now substituting 'academic performance'. So if you are in a "high performing" node you deserve the magnet extras but if you're unfortunate enough to live in a "low performing" node you don't.

Priority 7: Students whose nearest school is severely overcrowded and select a school that is not overcrowded as their first choice

How does a school get severely overcrowded in a controlled choice plan? One of the main selling points of this plan is that they set the capacity of the school and fill the school to that capacity level through the lottery. Once that school is at capacity, students are sent to one of their other choices. The only way I can really see this coming into play is in the first couple of years if a student who is currently at an overcrowded school applies for a less crowded school on the choice list. We all supposedly get to stay at our current schools if we want to so some schools will remain overcrowded. But for any newcomers to the system it shouldn't be a factor at all.

Who Likes the Choice Plan?

I attended a candidate question and answer session at Baileywick Park last night, which was truly wonderful. My favorite part of campaigning is talking with people about the issues. Not just telling them my viewpoints, but hearing theirs and having conversations. This has been true for me during all my years of advocacy on various school issues. I always come away with something positive from these conversations: an argument I had never thought of, a different interpretation of an argument, and always something to think about. So last night was wonderful because we had conversations. It got a little heated at times, but it was respectful and productive and I walked away with all kinds of thoughts spinning in my head.

The greatest conversations for me were about the Choice Plan. I rarely meet anybody who likes the choice plan and the ones who do say it's because "I get to pick which school I want". When we start talking about the lack of guarantees, however, they aren't so enthusiastic. But last night I heard from some parents who really like the choice model and for a good reason: nobody gets kicked out of their current school.

The parents I met have high schoolers and older children who went through the system. They've lived in Raleigh for many years--before developments like Falls River, Riverside, Bedford and Wakefield existed. As additional schools were built to handle the new growth, these families got reassigned from their 'neighborhood schools' to make room for newcomers. Not fair, in their eyes, and I completely understand their point of view. They want to stay in the school community they've been a part of for years.

I keep thinking about communities moving forward under this plan. I worry about the new family who moves into a neighborhood where most of the kids go to a school that isn't even on the new 'choice list' (this is the case for my node) or is so full that rising kindergarteners and other new students get bumped to a farther away school. What happens to our sense of community then? Or to the support that our communities at large give to our schools?

Complicating the situation is the fact that we've never had 'normal' reassignments. When a new school opened up it wasn't just the logical neighborhoods that were moved to fill the school--'diversity' was always taken into account, which often ended up creating a domino effect moving more students than truly necessary. Would parents have been as upset if the moves were logical? Would a family-friendly grandfathering policy have made a difference?

Whatever the new plan ends up looking like, we need to make sure our decisions are based on how things should be and not based on a reaction to the nonsensical moves of the past. There are still a lot of questions to be answered and many that haven't been asked yet. We all need to continue to talk about the assignment plan and ask questions. I was encouraged last night at Baileywick Park and I hope people continue to engage each other in conversation. It's the only way we'll ever get where we need to be.